as everyone has told you over a million times by now. It's F2P its no longer about subs anymore its about total profit and as they have said many many times the total profit is far above what it was when they had over 1 million subs.
Do you think by making up lies SWTOR will start to fail? Because guess what? its not.
It is all about total profit so why do people talk about SWTOR being the 2nd largest subscription mmo?
The last thing EA said about sub numbers is that they had dropped 25% post-F2P in August 2013. Now I am sure that Olsen was not lying when he said that subs were going up after the f2p launch but then they went down. As EA's CFO said in the formal results. Olsen was spinning. Same thing happened with WAR - subs going up in Jan, come formal Feb results subs had not gone up.
However EA have NOT said that total profit is far above what it was when they had over 1M subscribers - so essentially just after launch. Heck the game never even had 1M recurring subscribers. EA are simply not that specific. So much you need to know in order to make a comparison.
Originally posted by Vutar F2P is the way of the future. Isn't it awesome? Being nickle and dimed to death is wonderful. So much better than those crazy sub games that just include all that stuff for a flat fee.
swtor is NOT a f2p game !
it's a bullshit freemium game !
stop saying it is f2p, that is actually an insult to the f2p genre !
there are many good games out there that do not do the crap swtor does, the only reason they do is because a lot of morons are willing to put up with any bullshit they come up with just to play a star wars game.
(I'm looking at you die hard fans of star wars, stop paying and playing that BS so they relinquish the license sooner, maybe than someone else will actually make a good star wars mmorpg.)
same goes for the morons still paying for wow so ridiculous it makes me wanna barf !
the only reason many players still pay that sub is because of time invested in that BS game.
of course, it would be hard to peel them away from that game no matter how good any other game is.
for them it would mean learning everything all over again and practically years wasted and lost on wow if they should ever quit.
There is one simple reason that freemium isn't "BS." - Because quality games *always* give you the option to sub. No "true" F2P game which refuses to offer a sub has ever had anywhere close to the same production value as you get from the major players.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
Originally posted by ktanner3 To say that any company HAS to keep a game going shows a complete lack of understanding about how business works. No company keeps funding a product that isn't making money.To think EA would continue to fund an MMO that loses money is just.....weird.
100% agree that a company could close a game whenever it wanted to - although there could be breach of contract issues in some cases (not that that is likely here!)
A company might fund a game however even if it is losing money. Publicity is one reason but the most likely would be the impac that closing it might have on other games in the portfolio.
Think about the Bioware executives. They are [aid a salary, get a pension etc. etc. On a day to day basis they have no involvement in any particular game..
There will be two lots of numbers.
A "day to day" set with no charge for the execs and a second set with a percentage added - if there are 6 current games it might be 16.5%. And the SWTORs folks will be told to add 16.5% to the SWTORs cost base.
If that game is closed - WAR has been for example - the SWTORs folks will get a new number. 5 games now so 20%.
Suddenly SWTORs costs have gone up by (simplistically) 3.5%.
This could push DAoC say - or any other game - from profit to loss. Do you close that game? Then the number could go from 20% to 25%. What SWTORs could be costing another 5%?
And then you have the cost of the EA execs, the building, the security, the janitors, external auditors - huge list of stuff. Lots of categories and usually different numbers every month.
In the trenches people do there job, the revenue the game they are working on won't be impacted and there view of how well the game is doing won't be impacted - they won't be thinking about paying the wages of the execs.. Long term however staff may be cut etc. etc. but not in the short term.
Originally posted by CazNeerg There is one simple reason that freemium isn't "BS." - Because quality games *always* give you the option to sub. No "true" F2P game which refuses to offer a sub has ever had anywhere close to the same production value as you get from the major players.
Agree that freemium certainly isn't BS.
Don't agree however that sub = quality. Far to often it is just an attempt to fleece people these days - not always but often. And far to many games have tried to launch with a sub then gone f2p - and poor "f2p" games at that.
There are "non-traditional" freemium games with superb production values - Battlefield 3 to take another EA product. It is b2p in the truest sense. It also had a "premium membership" option - $50 for a year which provided guaranteed content drops. And EA booked over $100M in premium membership revenue - equates to 2-3M annual subscription.
I see these type of games as being closer to the early mmos like EQ1 and UO. Sub for network access - which was significant in those days; distinct cost for new content - usually an xpac. Network costs are relatively small today but content still costs. And there is no reason why it shouldn't be delivered as DLC - which is what e.g. BF3 did.
(Numbers not available for BF4 - and of course EA have shown once more that they are an Equal Opportunity Annoyer when it comes to bugs! Production values are there however)
Originally posted by CazNeerg There is one simple reason that freemium isn't "BS." - Because quality games *always* give you the option to sub. No "true" F2P game which refuses to offer a sub has ever had anywhere close to the same production value as you get from the major players.
Agree that freemium certainly isn't BS.
Don't agree however that sub = quality. Far to often it is just an attempt to fleece people these days - not always but often. And far to many games have tried to launch with a sub then gone f2p - and poor "f2p" games at that.
There are "non-traditional" freemium games with superb production values - Battlefield 3 to take another EA product. It is b2p in the truest sense. It also had a "premium membership" option - $50 for a year which provided guaranteed content drops. And EA booked over $100M in premium membership revenue - equates to 2-3M annual subscription.
I see these type of games as being closer to the early mmos like EQ1 and UO. Sub for network access - which was significant in those days; distinct cost for new content - usually an xpac. Network costs are relatively small today but content still costs. And there is no reason why it shouldn't be delivered as DLC - which is what e.g. BF3 did.
(Numbers not available for BF4 - and of course EA have shown once more that they are an Equal Opportunity Annoyer when it comes to bugs! Production values are there however)
I try to be careful with words. I didn't say the inclusion of a sub option was sufficient to guarantee quality, I meant that it appeared to be necessary to allow for it. And I am talking strictly about MMOs, which Battlefield 3 isn't. Games which later convert to freemium (basically all new sub games at this point) still have subs, they just aren't mandatory for access to the server anymore.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
While I do agree that charging for actionbars is about the greediest thing I have ever seen, I dont have an issue with most of the other F2P restrictions in the game since there is a way to get around most of them. I like the storylines and feel paying for a month or two of playtime is worth it. Thats $30 for a game you can play unlimited for 60 days. By that time you should have a level 55 toon who can farm Makeb or Ilum for comms and credits. I just run around Ilum for an hour and make $100k in credits and I'm not even trying to max my money making. After that, you can buy whatever you want from the auction house. Cartel packs are only $250k each and there are plenty of unlocks for sale way below $100k there. That means for $30 you can enjoy just about everything in the game.
Will the subscription permanently unlock some things? If that unlocked some storage and a few other perks permanently (like LotRO), then it would probably be worth it to me. If that is true do you know where there is a list of stuff the sub perma-unlocks? If it is in their FAQ I missed it.
Well it was in my reply I wrote to you , either in this thread or the other long running one. The purple items you have used as a subb will be permanently unlocked and I linked lots of guides too ill find a link to my post for you.
Found it to save you the bother.
If you subscribe for a month you will get the benefit of 500 cartel coins and also any artifacts ( purple gear you own ) will be still available to use when your subb drops ( you will become preferred ). Try these two pages for more in depth information about the three models subb , preferred and f2p.
I would probably download the security key app for either your cell/mobile or using a emulated one on your pc , it will gain you 100 cartel coins per month whatever model you are using.
The best things for me to unlock where ( because I have a lot of characters ) things like account cargo holds , account mailbox on my ships , healing droid on my ships. Not sure you will want those but I'm pretty sure you might want to buy some unlocks for Operations and/or warzones depending on your play style and what level you want to start those at.
Edit - just found a link to all his F2p experiment articles here -
PSO 4 years , EQOA 4 months , PSU 7 years , SWTOR launch ongoing , PSO2 SEA launch ongoing , Destiny 360 launch ongoing. "SWG was not fun. Let it go buddy." quote from iiNoSkillzii 10/18/13 The original propoganda pixie dust villain :[]
Originally posted by Torvaldr Thanks. This and another thread seem very similar. I thought my post got lost or something. It's probably in another thread. Anyway, thanks for the answer.
Hey I know what it's like , threads fill up with posts fairly quick. Those should give you a few good pointers , it is a bit of a complicated beast though with 3 models in place at once. Good Luck!
Cheers,
BadOrb.
PSO 4 years , EQOA 4 months , PSU 7 years , SWTOR launch ongoing , PSO2 SEA launch ongoing , Destiny 360 launch ongoing. "SWG was not fun. Let it go buddy." quote from iiNoSkillzii 10/18/13 The original propoganda pixie dust villain :[]
Originally posted by CazNeerg There is one simple reason that freemium isn't "BS." - Because quality games *always* give you the option to sub. No "true" F2P game which refuses to offer a sub has ever had anywhere close to the same production value as you get from the major players.
GW1+2 says hello
ohlen used the very same argument in the pre-launch discussion
guess what? their content wasnt good enough, for a sub game..
Originally posted by ktanner3 To say that any company HAS to keep a game going shows a complete lack of understanding about how business works. No company keeps funding a product that isn't making money.To think EA would continue to fund an MMO that loses money is just.....weird.
i said "pretty much" nice try , though
what would happen , if they had to shut Down swtor?
think about it, and tell me, that they have a real choice
PS how successful was warhammer online , before they shut that Down?
guess what? their content wasnt good enough, for a sub game..
If the content was bad, people wouldn't have waited until after they finished it before they stopped subscribing. The argument that games convert to a freemium system because they lack quality is inconsistent with the evidence, and you know it is. Get some new material.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
guess what? their content wasnt good enough, for a sub game..
If the content was bad, people wouldn't have waited until after they finished it before they stopped subscribing. The argument that games convert to a freemium system because they lack quality is inconsistent with the evidence, and you know it is. Get some new material.
Originally posted by Vutar F2P is the way of the future. Isn't it awesome? Being nickle and dimed to death is wonderful. So much better than those crazy sub games that just include all that stuff for a flat fee.
People similar to you, complained about subscription costs until F2P was brought in to replace it. Everyone got what they asked for, unfortunately. What they really meant to say is that they expect game companies to make games for free. Because, you know, that makes sense for a business plan.
Nobody complained about subscription costs with SWTOR.... That was EA making false claims as to why their game was dying at an alarming rate. People stopped playing SWTOR because it was terrible once you got through your first story character. Operations were broken. The PvP gearing system was asinine, and Illum was a joke.
I don't know, I think what they had at release was decent. The problem was it took them far too long to fix problems and get out new content. Post release they basically just took the money and ran. If they had a plan in place to get out meaty updates at a regular pace things could have been different. Players wouldn't have failed bored and cheated. You can't expect players to stay and pay when they aren't getting any new content. Subscriptions weren't the issue per se, paying money for nothing was the issues and one they could have fixed by actually you know, providing players with value for their money. Instead they cut and ran to be one of the fastest switches to F2P.
Not only was that lack of effort to turn things around discouraging, but when their F2P finally came out it was one of the worst/most prohibitive models I have seen. Then they turned free patch content into an expansion pack... The game itself isn't too bad, but the company is terrible and I won't give them another dime on principle.
Originally posted by Vutar F2P is the way of the future. Isn't it awesome? Being nickle and dimed to death is wonderful. So much better than those crazy sub games that just include all that stuff for a flat fee.
love this post, sarcasm FTW haha
I'll pay 15€ any day over a F2P game any day (except GW2.....they made it actually work).
Originally posted by Vutar F2P is the way of the future. Isn't it awesome? Being nickle and dimed to death is wonderful. So much better than those crazy sub games that just include all that stuff for a flat fee.
love this post, sarcasm FTW haha
I'll pay 15€ any day over a F2P game any day (except GW2.....they made it actually work).
Originally posted by simplius Originally posted by Kicksave321Originally posted by simpliusokay, TODAY: roughly 1 mio customersAT LAUNCH: roughly 2,8 mio customers1 mio vs 1,8 mio,,which one has the most potential?two things keep swtor afloat:EAs deal with disneyand the ASTRONOMICAL budgetthey , pretty much , HAVE to keep it aliveand do note: we didnt even want swtor , to shut downwe just wanted something bettercompetition is always good for the marketmonopoly is bad
Every single person on this site knows you have never and will never provide facts or links to back up your rants. So on on that note please provide a link that backs up anything you said here, while your at it provide links for anything you have ever said. what happened, after you had the last link? nothing..
if you want links, find them yourself
This would be an awesome response if so much of the stuff you posted wasn't obviously just made up.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by jbombard Originally posted by Vunak23Originally posted by MindTriggerOriginally posted by VutarF2P is the way of the future. Isn't it awesome? Being nickle and dimed to death is wonderful. So much better than those crazy sub games that just include all that stuff for a flat fee.
People similar to you, complained about subscription costs until F2P was brought in to replace it. Everyone got what they asked for, unfortunately. What they really meant to say is that they expect game companies to make games for free. Because, you know, that makes sense for a business plan.Nobody complained about subscription costs with SWTOR.... That was EA making false claims as to why their game was dying at an alarming rate. People stopped playing SWTOR because it was terrible once you got through your first story character. Operations were broken. The PvP gearing system was asinine, and Illum was a joke. I don't know, I think what they had at release was decent. The problem was it took them far too long to fix problems and get out new content. Post release they basically just took the money and ran. If they had a plan in place to get out meaty updates at a regular pace things could have been different. Players wouldn't have failed bored and cheated. You can't expect players to stay and pay when they aren't getting any new content. Subscriptions weren't the issue per se, paying money for nothing was the issues and one they could have fixed by actually you know, providing players with value for their money. Instead they cut and ran to be one of the fastest switches to F2P.
Not only was that lack of effort to turn things around discouraging, but when their F2P finally came out it was one of the worst/most prohibitive models I have seen. Then they turned free patch content into an expansion pack... The game itself isn't too bad, but the company is terrible and I won't give them another dime on principle.
On the other hand, when they went F2P, their subscriptions increased and they gained half a million or so F2P players.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Originally posted by mstrsrevati Being a huge Star Wars fan and the fact that I played Star Wars Galaxies from day one until they launched their doom which was the new player addition. That killed the best game ever. Anyway, as soon as SWTOR was ready to launch I was buying my account, not just a normal account but the limited addition to get the special bike and other nifty things. After about 6months of playing I left the game because I realized this game wasn't going to be like the other at all. The community was different, there was no housing, no real player role play just storyline, and being a crafter I hated their crafting system. So I moved on and gave away what I could to the few people I made friends with. I was going to try going back but after reading all of this I don't think I'll bother. But I am curious to ask if I had a sith character and I logged in on that account would i be able to play it? or would she be deleted already? I wasn't going to get into a sub again until I decided whether I was going to stay or not, but if I can't play my sith then I don't see the point of doing the download. Anyone have any idea whether I'd be able to play her or not? Thanks.
I wouldn't take notice of some forum posts in this thread , it's not all doom and gloom I assure you. Now to your question , no characters have been deleted at all ever. So yes you will be able to play on her , the only thing that might have happened to her though is she may have been moved to another server , possibly loosing her name and/or lost her name recently due to freeing up some names. Other than that you will be a preferred player and have various restrictions , unless you subb. You will have 4 skill bars though as a preferred player like you did 6 months after launch. You have a credit cap of 350 k as a preferred too.
Cheers,
BadOrb.
Thank you for answering my questions BadOrb took me awhile to find this. I will think about coming back, I want to talk to a few gamer friends of mine who might still play to see what their view is on it. Good luck out there in the Galaxy
Originally posted by CazNeerg There is one simple reason that freemium isn't "BS." - Because quality games *always* give you the option to sub. No "true" F2P game which refuses to offer a sub has ever had anywhere close to the same production value as you get from the major players.
GW1+2 says hello
ohlen used the very same argument in the pre-launch discussion
guess what? their content wasnt good enough, for a sub game..
I try to be careful with words. I didn't say the inclusion of a sub option was sufficient to guarantee quality, I meant that it appeared to be necessary to allow for it. And I am talking strictly about MMOs, which Battlefield 3 isn't. Games which later convert to freemium (basically all new sub games at this point) still have subs, they just aren't mandatory for access to the server anymore.
Apologies - didn't read carefully enough. However I feel BF3, as an example, is valid and a business model that could be applied.
Now is BF3 an mmo? Well like you in I would say no - perhaps I am old school and my mind set is shaped by concepts of persistent and open world. If challenged however? Compared to many "mmos" on the market today?
Lots of instancing; limits on raid sizes; leader boards; daily quests often done solo; "open world" simply means "big map" - although who would run across something the size of the Karanas today! And most games these days have access to some VOIP system or other, Mumble or whatever.
As I say my inclination is the same as yours but ...compared to many quote mmos unquote I don't see why content drops delivered via paid DLC shouldn't work and given the legion of sub-based failures work better. And, again like you, I can't see SWTOR going that way (or other recent games that launched with a sub) whilst they have a core rump of subscribers paying for some loosely defined service - think CoD Elite (now defunct).
SW Battlefields could be interesting. Same engine so essentially it will be a Battlefield game. Yet it could look a lot like SWTOR - they could even add some account linked stuff like housing. We don't think of BF as being an mmo though so I suspect we won't mentally tag SW:BF as an mmo. That might not be a bad thing however given the fate of recent "mmos".
Originally posted by simpliusokay, TODAY: roughly 1 mio customersAT LAUNCH: roughly 2,8 mio customers1 mio vs 1,8 mio,,which one has the most potential?two things keep swtor afloat:EAs deal with disneyand the ASTRONOMICAL budgetthey , pretty much , HAVE to keep it aliveand do note: we didnt even want swtor , to shut downwe just wanted something bettercompetition is always good for the marketmonopoly is bad
Every single person on this site knows you have never and will never provide facts or links to back up your rants. So on on that note please provide a link that backs up anything you said here, while your at it provide links for anything you have ever said.
what happened, after you had the last link? nothing..
if you want links, find them yourself
This would be an awesome response if so much of the stuff you posted wasn't obviously just made up.
like EAs 10 mio "something" number, that turned into 10 mio accounts?
its even in the movie " truth is a matter of perspective"
Originally posted by CazNeerg There is one simple reason that freemium isn't "BS." - Because quality games *always* give you the option to sub. No "true" F2P game which refuses to offer a sub has ever had anywhere close to the same production value as you get from the major players.
GW1+2 says hello
ohlen used the very same argument in the pre-launch discussion
guess what? their content wasnt good enough, for a sub game..
GW 1 and 2 are not f2p.
theyre not sub games either, and theyre doing/did pretty well
but STO will be happy, theyve sold a bunch of LIFE subscriptions
Comments
Simplus will never ever give any proof for any of his statements.
It is all about total profit so why do people talk about SWTOR being the 2nd largest subscription mmo?
The last thing EA said about sub numbers is that they had dropped 25% post-F2P in August 2013. Now I am sure that Olsen was not lying when he said that subs were going up after the f2p launch but then they went down. As EA's CFO said in the formal results. Olsen was spinning. Same thing happened with WAR - subs going up in Jan, come formal Feb results subs had not gone up.
However EA have NOT said that total profit is far above what it was when they had over 1M subscribers - so essentially just after launch. Heck the game never even had 1M recurring subscribers. EA are simply not that specific. So much you need to know in order to make a comparison.
swtor is NOT a f2p game !
it's a bullshit freemium game !
stop saying it is f2p, that is actually an insult to the f2p genre !
there are many good games out there that do not do the crap swtor does, the only reason they do is because a lot of morons are willing to put up with any bullshit they come up with just to play a star wars game.
(I'm looking at you die hard fans of star wars, stop paying and playing that BS so they relinquish the license sooner, maybe than someone else will actually make a good star wars mmorpg.)
same goes for the morons still paying for wow so ridiculous it makes me wanna barf !
the only reason many players still pay that sub is because of time invested in that BS game.
of course, it would be hard to peel them away from that game no matter how good any other game is.
for them it would mean learning everything all over again and practically years wasted and lost on wow if they should ever quit.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
100% agree that a company could close a game whenever it wanted to - although there could be breach of contract issues in some cases (not that that is likely here!)
A company might fund a game however even if it is losing money. Publicity is one reason but the most likely would be the impac that closing it might have on other games in the portfolio.
Think about the Bioware executives. They are [aid a salary, get a pension etc. etc. On a day to day basis they have no involvement in any particular game..
There will be two lots of numbers.
A "day to day" set with no charge for the execs and a second set with a percentage added - if there are 6 current games it might be 16.5%. And the SWTORs folks will be told to add 16.5% to the SWTORs cost base.
If that game is closed - WAR has been for example - the SWTORs folks will get a new number. 5 games now so 20%.
Suddenly SWTORs costs have gone up by (simplistically) 3.5%.
This could push DAoC say - or any other game - from profit to loss. Do you close that game? Then the number could go from 20% to 25%. What SWTORs could be costing another 5%?
And then you have the cost of the EA execs, the building, the security, the janitors, external auditors - huge list of stuff. Lots of categories and usually different numbers every month.
In the trenches people do there job, the revenue the game they are working on won't be impacted and there view of how well the game is doing won't be impacted - they won't be thinking about paying the wages of the execs.. Long term however staff may be cut etc. etc. but not in the short term.
Agree that freemium certainly isn't BS.
Don't agree however that sub = quality. Far to often it is just an attempt to fleece people these days - not always but often. And far to many games have tried to launch with a sub then gone f2p - and poor "f2p" games at that.
There are "non-traditional" freemium games with superb production values - Battlefield 3 to take another EA product. It is b2p in the truest sense. It also had a "premium membership" option - $50 for a year which provided guaranteed content drops. And EA booked over $100M in premium membership revenue - equates to 2-3M annual subscription.
I see these type of games as being closer to the early mmos like EQ1 and UO. Sub for network access - which was significant in those days; distinct cost for new content - usually an xpac. Network costs are relatively small today but content still costs. And there is no reason why it shouldn't be delivered as DLC - which is what e.g. BF3 did.
(Numbers not available for BF4 - and of course EA have shown once more that they are an Equal Opportunity Annoyer when it comes to bugs! Production values are there however)
I try to be careful with words. I didn't say the inclusion of a sub option was sufficient to guarantee quality, I meant that it appeared to be necessary to allow for it. And I am talking strictly about MMOs, which Battlefield 3 isn't. Games which later convert to freemium (basically all new sub games at this point) still have subs, they just aren't mandatory for access to the server anymore.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
Well it was in my reply I wrote to you , either in this thread or the other long running one. The purple items you have used as a subb will be permanently unlocked and I linked lots of guides too ill find a link to my post for you.
Found it to save you the bother.
If you subscribe for a month you will get the benefit of 500 cartel coins and also any artifacts ( purple gear you own ) will be still available to use when your subb drops ( you will become preferred ). Try these two pages for more in depth information about the three models subb , preferred and f2p.
http://www.reddit.com/r/swtor/wiki/f2p
http://massively.joystiq.com/2013/08/20/hyperspace-beacon-six-misconceptions-about-swtor-free-to-play/
I would probably download the security key app for either your cell/mobile or using a emulated one on your pc , it will gain you 100 cartel coins per month whatever model you are using.
The best things for me to unlock where ( because I have a lot of characters ) things like account cargo holds , account mailbox on my ships , healing droid on my ships. Not sure you will want those but I'm pretty sure you might want to buy some unlocks for Operations and/or warzones depending on your play style and what level you want to start those at.
Edit - just found a link to all his F2p experiment articles here -
http://massively.joystiq.com/tag/f2p-experiment/
Cheers,
BadOrb.
PSO 4 years , EQOA 4 months , PSU 7 years , SWTOR launch ongoing , PSO2 SEA launch ongoing , Destiny 360 launch ongoing.
"SWG was not fun. Let it go buddy." quote from iiNoSkillzii 10/18/13
The original propoganda pixie dust villain :[]
Hey I know what it's like , threads fill up with posts fairly quick. Those should give you a few good pointers , it is a bit of a complicated beast though with 3 models in place at once. Good Luck!
Cheers,
BadOrb.
PSO 4 years , EQOA 4 months , PSU 7 years , SWTOR launch ongoing , PSO2 SEA launch ongoing , Destiny 360 launch ongoing.
"SWG was not fun. Let it go buddy." quote from iiNoSkillzii 10/18/13
The original propoganda pixie dust villain :[]
what happened, after you had the last link? nothing..
if you want links, find them yourself
GW1+2 says hello
ohlen used the very same argument in the pre-launch discussion
guess what? their content wasnt good enough, for a sub game..
i said "pretty much" nice try , though
what would happen , if they had to shut Down swtor?
think about it, and tell me, that they have a real choice
PS how successful was warhammer online , before they shut that Down?
If the content was bad, people wouldn't have waited until after they finished it before they stopped subscribing. The argument that games convert to a freemium system because they lack quality is inconsistent with the evidence, and you know it is. Get some new material.
Peace is a lie, there is only passion.
Through passion, I gain strength.
Through strength, I gain power.
Through power, I gain victory.
Through victory, my chains are broken.
The Force shall free me.
BUY 2 PORSCHEs, GET THE 3rd FOR FREE
or , was it soap..its hard to tell...isnt it?
I don't know, I think what they had at release was decent. The problem was it took them far too long to fix problems and get out new content. Post release they basically just took the money and ran. If they had a plan in place to get out meaty updates at a regular pace things could have been different. Players wouldn't have failed bored and cheated. You can't expect players to stay and pay when they aren't getting any new content. Subscriptions weren't the issue per se, paying money for nothing was the issues and one they could have fixed by actually you know, providing players with value for their money. Instead they cut and ran to be one of the fastest switches to F2P.
Not only was that lack of effort to turn things around discouraging, but when their F2P finally came out it was one of the worst/most prohibitive models I have seen. Then they turned free patch content into an expansion pack... The game itself isn't too bad, but the company is terrible and I won't give them another dime on principle.
love this post, sarcasm FTW
haha
I'll pay 15€ any day over a F2P game any day (except GW2.....they made it actually work).
+2
what happened, after you had the last link? nothing..
if you want links, find them yourself
This would be an awesome response if so much of the stuff you posted wasn't obviously just made up.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Nobody complained about subscription costs with SWTOR.... That was EA making false claims as to why their game was dying at an alarming rate. People stopped playing SWTOR because it was terrible once you got through your first story character. Operations were broken. The PvP gearing system was asinine, and Illum was a joke.
I don't know, I think what they had at release was decent. The problem was it took them far too long to fix problems and get out new content. Post release they basically just took the money and ran. If they had a plan in place to get out meaty updates at a regular pace things could have been different. Players wouldn't have failed bored and cheated. You can't expect players to stay and pay when they aren't getting any new content. Subscriptions weren't the issue per se, paying money for nothing was the issues and one they could have fixed by actually you know, providing players with value for their money. Instead they cut and ran to be one of the fastest switches to F2P.
Not only was that lack of effort to turn things around discouraging, but when their F2P finally came out it was one of the worst/most prohibitive models I have seen. Then they turned free patch content into an expansion pack... The game itself isn't too bad, but the company is terrible and I won't give them another dime on principle.
On the other hand, when they went F2P, their subscriptions increased and they gained half a million or so F2P players.
I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.
Thank you for answering my questions BadOrb took me awhile to find this. I will think about coming back, I want to talk to a few gamer friends of mine who might still play to see what their view is on it. Good luck out there in the Galaxy
GW 1 and 2 are not f2p.
Apologies - didn't read carefully enough. However I feel BF3, as an example, is valid and a business model that could be applied.
Now is BF3 an mmo? Well like you in I would say no - perhaps I am old school and my mind set is shaped by concepts of persistent and open world. If challenged however? Compared to many "mmos" on the market today?
Lots of instancing; limits on raid sizes; leader boards; daily quests often done solo; "open world" simply means "big map" - although who would run across something the size of the Karanas today! And most games these days have access to some VOIP system or other, Mumble or whatever.
As I say my inclination is the same as yours but ...compared to many quote mmos unquote I don't see why content drops delivered via paid DLC shouldn't work and given the legion of sub-based failures work better. And, again like you, I can't see SWTOR going that way (or other recent games that launched with a sub) whilst they have a core rump of subscribers paying for some loosely defined service - think CoD Elite (now defunct).
SW Battlefields could be interesting. Same engine so essentially it will be a Battlefield game. Yet it could look a lot like SWTOR - they could even add some account linked stuff like housing. We don't think of BF as being an mmo though so I suspect we won't mentally tag SW:BF as an mmo. That might not be a bad thing however given the fate of recent "mmos".
+1
like EAs 10 mio "something" number, that turned into 10 mio accounts?
its even in the movie " truth is a matter of perspective"
or, would you argue with a jedi master?
theyre not sub games either, and theyre doing/did pretty well
but STO will be happy, theyve sold a bunch of LIFE subscriptions
i guess, that would make them big League..finally